Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR López

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

2/3/06

2/14/06

HB

SHORT TITLE Require Paper Ballots for all Voting Systems

SB 295/aSRC/aSPAC/aSFl#1

ANALYST Medina

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY06

FY07

(See Fiscal Implications)

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to HB 530, which contains a $4,000.0 appropriation to implement the provisions of the

bill.

Duplicates HB 430

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Attorney General (AG)

Secretary of State (SOS)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of SFl Amendment # 1

Senate Floor Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 295, as amended, strikes Senate Public Affairs

Committee Amendments 2 through 4. The bill is then amended to require all voting systems used

in elections covered by the Election Code to use a paper ballot, provided that voting systems

owned or used by a county on March 1, 2006 that do not use a paper ballot may be used until

sufficient federal, state or local funds are available to replace the voting systems, acquire the

necessary software, pay the existing debt on the voting systems to be replaced and provide suffi-

cient funding for the Secretary of State to purchase the paper ballots for all counties to use on the

new voting systems for primary and general elections. This amendment strikes the December 31,

2007 deadline, which in previous versions was an alternate deadline requiring the use of voting

systems with paper ballots.

Senate Bill 295/aSRC/aSPAC/aSFl#1 – Page

2

Synopsis of SPAC Amendment

Senate Public Affairs Committee Amendment to Senate Bill 295, as amended, strikes the Senate

Rules Committee Amendment. The amendment then refines the requirement that all voting sys-

tems owned or used by a county on March 1, 2006 that do not use a paper ballot may be used

until the first occurrence of the following:

(1)

and adequate supply of voting systems is available and are available to:

a.

replace the voting systems;

b.

acquire the necessary software;

c.

pay the existing debt on the voting systems to be replaced; and

d.

provide sufficient funding for the Secretary of State to purchase the paper bal-

lots for all counties to use on the new voting systems for primary and general

elections; or December 31, 2007.

The amendment further clarifies that in any event, a voting system shall not be used if it has not

been certified by the Secretary of State and if a competitive bid process has not been completed

that includes at least two different voting system manufacturers that have certified paper ballot

systems.

Synopsis of SRC Amendment

Senate Rules Committee Amendment to Senate Bill 295 refines the requirement that all voting

systems owned or used by a county on March 1, 2006 that do not use a paper ballot may be used

until the first occurrence of the following: sufficient federal, state or local funds are available to

replace the voting system, acquire the necessary software, provide sufficient funding for the Sec-

retary of State to purchase the paper ballots for all counties to use on the new voting system for

primary and general elections and an adequate supply of voting systems is available or December

31, 2007.

Synopsis of Original Bill

Senate Bill 295 amends the Election Code to require the use of paper ballots for all voting sys-

tems in the state. The bill requires that all voting systems that do not use paper ballots be re-

moved and that county clerks insure that an adequate number of voting booths are provided at

polling places. The bill further requires that the paper ballot from this system be used for the

purpose of conducting recounts. Currently, non-paper ballot elections are permissible until De-

cember 31, 2007 or until sufficient federal, state or local funds are available to replace the cur-

rent inventory of touch screen systems and an adequate supply of paper ballot systems are avail-

able. This bill prohibits the purchase of non-paper ballot systems after March 1, 2006 and re-

quires a delayed repeal of the statute setting that standards for touch screen voting system stan-

dards on December 31, 2007. This bill carries and emergency clause.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

This is a companion bill House Bill 530, which carries an appropriation of $4,000.0 from the

general fund to the Secretary of State for the purpose of purchasing voting machines from coun-

ties that purchased voting machines to meet new voting system standards. The appropriation

would be made if legislation, such as House Bill 430, is enacted requiring the replacement of

those voting machines.

Senate Bill 295/aSRC/aSPAC/aSFl#1 – Page

3

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

According to the Attorney General’s Office,

“If New Mexico goes to a paper ballot system, it will need tabulators on site (i.e. to feed the

ballot into). The federal HAVA money will fund a tabulator at every “polling place.” This

raises two questions:

(a)

State law Section 1-9-5 uses the term one voting system per “precinct”—does that

mean there will be a tabulator in every polling place or every precinct.

(b)

can the state save money and amend State law Section 1-9-5 so there only needs to be

one tabulator per 800 or 1000 voters.

The Attorney General’s Office supports the policy choice of going to a uniform paper ballot

system. The AGO believes it is the better system to restore public confidence in elections

and a uniform system will create greater consistency in the administration of elections. The

AGO also believes this will decrease election litigation filed against the Secretary of State.

There is current litigation against the Secretary of State (Lopategui, et al v. Secretary of

State, CV 2005-00443, State District Court) requesting the out-right prohibition of touch

screen systems in New Mexico. The case is currently in discovery and may have a trial date

before June 2006.”

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

According to the Secretary of State,

“If House Bill 430 is enacted a statewide education program by the secretary of state will

be needed to educate the county clerks who are not currently using paper based systems

on the programming, testing, certification procedures and Election Day use. County

clerks as well will need to reeducate all of the Election Day workers (poll officials) as

well as early voting workers on the proper use of the machines. Voters in the counties

will also need to be instruction on the use of the machine.”

The Secretary of State would also need to train and certify county elections staff on the use of the

election programming and result reporting software.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

This bill is a companion to House Bill 530 and a duplicate of House Bill 430.

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

The Attorney General’s Office states:

“A paper ballot system is not a panacea for solving election fraud. The Legislature

should consider devices and controls to ensure that paper ballots are not “found in a box”

on Election Day.

The opposition to touch screen machines is based on allegations of electronic manipula-

tion. The tabulators are also electronic devices and the Legislature should consider add-

ing greater testing sessions in public venues in advance of the election to establish public

confidence that the tabulators are free from fraud.”

DXM/nt:mt:nt:yr